I too am worried a little about new ownership; however, I am keeping a optimistic outlook that this will bring us a better product.

One thing about PocoMail (and Barca too) is there is no other comparable e-mail client (IMHO). Especially the way it handles multiple e-mail accounts and it's scripting language. PocoMail is the best e-mail client for my needs. I am looking forward to the new release.

Me too, I'm concerned about new ownership, if it is Yahoo, then rtemember MSoft are trying to buy them out and you know what that will mean.

I'm satisfied with Pocomail as it is, however, new improvements may very well suit me.

Whatever happens I'll always stay with Poco.

I have just had a thought, a new owner may want Poco to use the activation caper, that is, so many installs and thats it.
If that does come about I will not take V5, I am sick, sore and tired of re-activating, sometimes I think I'm the criminal by re-installing the programs, it is a real hassle.

skerns: nothing to worry about re ownership change, it's not Yahoo and it was done in part to secure PocoMail future going forward, as you're used to it.

I am of course disappointed too that we didn't deliver what we wanted in 5.0 (which was going to include a new HTML engine, 4.8 unfortunately won't). You do have to understand that Poco Systems is a small outfit, we do what we can with the resources available. Some people's needs will change and PocoMail/Barca won't be able to meet them any more, I understand that. I also hear from a lot of people how they desperately need exactly what PocoMail and Barca is right now, concerned that we're no longer around, so our priority is to make sure we stick around and provide support for the product, and grow the product as we can.

There is a reason why many of our competitors faded away over the past few years - this is a tough market to be in but we think it still needs options like PocoMail.

On the positive side: we have some really exciting stuff planned for 5.0, can't wait to get going on it!

Slaven wrote:Some people's needs will change and PocoMail/Barca won't be able to meet them any more, I understand that.

Slaven, what does this sentence mean? Does it mean that v5.0 still won't have the new HTML engine?

I was just talking in general, I get emails from people who get a new job at a company that requires them to use Outlook with Exchange server for calendaring/scheduling and they wish we could add support for that into PocoMail as well - some things are just out of our reach.

The new HTML engine is still in plans, but we have to get through 4.8 first.

When I saw that there will be a v4.8, it was quite clear to me that it won't contain a new HTML engine. But a v5.0 without a new HTML engine would have been really disappointing. Now I'm a bit relieved.

Slaven wrote:...I get emails from people who get a new job at a company that requires them to use Outlook with Exchange server for calendaring/scheduling and they wish we could add support for that into PocoMail as well - some things are just out of our reach.

I seem to recall that the specification for the Exchange protocol has been published, but also that it was hundreds of pages long so it would take any organisation a while to decode that: it's no surprise that most or even all non-MS e-mail clients won't support it - in this respect Barca is no different to many others.

This is supposed to be, however, a positive comment not a "knock" against Poco.

Slaven wrote:...I get emails from people who get a new job at a company that requires them to use Outlook with Exchange server for calendaring/scheduling and they wish we could add support for that into PocoMail as well - some things are just out of our reach.

I seem to recall that the specification for the Exchange protocol has been published, but also that it was hundreds of pages long so it would take any organisation a while to decode that: it's no surprise that most or even all non-MS e-mail clients won't support it - in this respect Barca is no different to many others.

This is supposed to be, however, a positive comment not a "knock" against Poco.

Granted... However, when you associate Micorsoft's dominant position (like it or not), the proliferation of Windows Mobile based smart phones and what ActiveSync and Sync Center (in Vista) expect, then Barca2 will continue to be excluded from all serious business applications which require mail & calendar synchronization with Exchange servers.

Like Slaven stated, if the application doesn't suit the need, then we need to move elsewhere... which is what we did (Outlook 200x). This being said, I keep Barca2 on my main home computer and on my netbook (Acer Aspire ONE). This is because Barca2 suits me just fine. It's too bad that I can't easily sync contacts and calendars, but hey, it's what it is.

PSI made a business decision tied to resources and priorities. If Slaven has identified a niche market that Barca and PM can fill, then this is where they need to focus on.

Forward looking, I am now curious to see what will be offered in version 4.8

Slaven wrote:...I get emails from people who get a new job at a company that requires them to use Outlook with Exchange server for calendaring/scheduling and they wish we could add support for that into PocoMail as well - some things are just out of our reach.

I seem to recall that the specification for the Exchange protocol has been published, but also that it was hundreds of pages long so it would take any organisation a while to decode that: it's no surprise that most or even all non-MS e-mail clients won't support it - in this respect Barca is no different to many others.

This is supposed to be, however, a positive comment not a "knock" against Poco.

I completely agree with you, it may be unfortunate but it's just a physical constraints of the development process. As Flashfox puts it

PSI made a business decision tied to resources and priorities. If Slaven has identified a niche market that Barca and PM can fill, then this is where they need to focus on.

Looking forward to the public release of 4.8 beta Slaven. Been missing you guys. Maybe it will be ready for RTM by December17th.. (my 65th birthday - in lieu of flowers, send wenches, ale, goats and gold coin to address on file

Shy

Feel free to add 781 posts to the number of posts shown by my avatar..

Slaven wrote:around, so our priority is to make sure we stick around and provide support for the product, and grow the product as we can.

There is a reason why many of our competitors faded away over the past few years - this is a tough market to be in but we think it still needs options like PocoMail.

Yes there is a reason and the list is growing

Eudora became Penelope (Mozilla) and has seen very little development since. Which is understandable since they have TBird.

Courier is about to be rebranded. There is speculation in its discussion group too about who the new parent will be. In
Courier's case the old Calypso codebase is to be abandoned and the Courier name to be pasted onto a, it is hoped, more serviceable one.

Mulberry went bankrupt and has resurfaced as open source. Traffic in the Mulberry programmer's discussion group has just about trickled away. There was hope there that some requester of new features would be willing to pay a programmer's wage for them. Oh, Dear.

There are a number of lesser players that can remain on the scene because few resources were committed in the first place.

I agree with some others here that improved message editing and Imap durabilty are key to Poco's economic viability under any name.

I really think, Slaven, that the old model of selling incremental small improvements to a loyal user base is no longer viable. You really need a fairly complete, well working product to continue in this market.